Welcome Guest! If you are already a member of the BMW MOA, please log in to the forum in the upper right hand corner of this page. Check "Remember Me?" if you wish to stay logged in.

We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMWMOA forum provides.
Why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on
the forum, the club magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMWMOA offers?Want to read the MOA monthly magazine for free? Take a 3-month test ride of the magazine; check here for details.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will need to join the MOA before you can post: click this register link to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

NOTE. Some content will be hidden from you. If you want to view all content, you must register for the forum if you are not a member, or if a member, you must be logged in.

I still think there are people out there-maybe even MC enthusiasts that could share information thats already been created? ON articles from people like the experts that were called in to provide seminars to my apprenticeship group on oils,greases,bearings & so on? Surely somebody is already testing oils and has the information.

Most can recall the marketing hype for products such as Slick-50; this product did not appear to offer the magic that was advertised. It is interesting to see more respectible scientific publications carrying articles about use of nano-technology to improve lubricants. For example, "Experimental analysis of tribological properties of lubricating oils with nanoparticle additives" can be found here -http://144.206.159.178/ft/1095/593911/12245181.pdf

I hope that an evaluation will make use of existing standard test methods. The ASTM has a number of such standards that apply to automotive oils

Well that was certainly the point. It appears that national labs for testing oil are ISO certified and use ASTM standards. All testing done for the past MOA articles were done by the National Tribology Services lab, now Bently Tribology Services:

Hey Kurt,
I don't know if you are taking brand-oriented suggestions for the analysis, but I'd like to see an independent analysis of the Redline 20W50 synthetic... I've been seeing it on the shelf at Cycle Gear, and have been thinking about trying it out (I've had good results with their gear oil): http://www.redlineoil.com/product.aspx?pid=8&pcid=21

I'd be curious if an independent lab would get results consistent with their posted data. I think it's pretty neat that they post that information. I think your idea is a good one- I learned a lot from the DiCarlo article. Updated info would be interesting.

At some point, I would want to get some kind of consensus on oils/brands to test. I haven't thought that far ahead...kind of waiting for the organization here at my work to give me some guidance.

My thoughts were:

- have some connection to past oils tested (for continuity in different tests)
- concentrate on SG/SH rated oils, maybe include oils that have a later grade but still "meet" SG/SH (so that say!)
- I don't want to get too wild and crazy about viscosities...the Airheads take 20w50, maybe 10w40 in some situations
- some mix of dino and synthetic and semi-synthetic

As this moves forward, I would take a look at what people suggest plus oils that I've heard about in recent discussions.

RE: the Redline...can those zinc and phosphorus numbers be right? If the numbers of 0.25% and 0.21% are right, that's bordering on being too much from the reading I've been doing. I think that more is not necessarily better.

At some point, I would want to get some kind of consensus on oils/brands to test. I haven't thought that far ahead...kind of waiting for the organization here at my work to give me some guidance.

My thoughts were:

- have some connection to past oils tested (for continuity in different tests)
- concentrate on SG/SH rated oils, maybe include oils that have a later grade but still "meet" SG/SH (so that say!)
- I don't want to get too wild and crazy about viscosities...the Airheads take 20w50, maybe 10w40 in some situations
- some mix of dino and synthetic and semi-synthetic

As this moves forward, I would take a look at what people suggest plus oils that I've heard about in recent discussions.

RE: the Redline...can those zinc and phosphorus numbers be right? If the numbers of 0.25% and 0.21% are right, that's bordering on being too much from the reading I've been doing. I think that more is not necessarily better.

This all sounds good to me, Kurt! I think you're developing a good approach that will yield informative results.

In regard to the Red Line oil, the zinc/phosphorus levels certainly appear higher than any of the analysis in the Di Carlo article (although I haven't converted from %wt to ppm, so it may not be as big a difference as it appears?). I did poke around on the Spectro and Mobile 1 websites looking for info, but didn't see any posted data on their wear additives (my web-sleuthing skills are marginal, so it may be there and I just didn't see it!). My thought was that the Red Line posting was unique in the sense of it could give you manufacturer data to compare against if you include it in this analysis.

(although I haven't converted from %wt to ppm, so it may not be as big a difference as it appears?)

I, too, wondered about the conversion. But from I've seen, multiplying the percent weight by 10000 gives ppm. So, 0.25% is 2500 ppm. This assumes that the % is percent of weight and we want parts per million by weight.

past oil test

Hi 20744: The information may be too dated, but Alan G of the INOA had done an oil analisist of several brands more than a few years ago. This included Red Line. If you like I will try to find it. Frank Coleman I went to find it. try www.inoanorton.com/docs/OilTemp.pdf

Thanks, Frank. Seems that it more about oil temps...what's been the focus in the past is basic oil chemistry and the protection it provides for wear and corrosion. I was considering just continuing that process with new oils today with links to popular oils from the past.

That's going to hurt!

I received some information about various tests along with costs. The tests that seem interesting and useful to me are:

- oil spectrometry or ICP -- provides chemical analysis of the oil (essentially what's been done in the past)
- viscosity at 40 and 100C -- this would tell how good the blending was to create the given weight of oil
- TAN/TBN -- total acid number and total base number; this provides information on the quality of the additive package

Costs (per bottle) are around:

- ICP -- $50
- Viscosity -- $65
- TAN/TBN -- $100

I guess I can see why only the oil chemistry was done in the past, and only 10-15 bottles were tested, with limitiatons for weight and dino/synth!!

Homage to Oil

I saw this "oil tree" in the lobby of one of the buildings where I work...they perform commerical testing for large companies. Up near the top are some oils in the paper containers...I remember those well!

If there's been some updated analysis recently, I've not seen it. But my concern would be the different outcomes needed for air-cooled bikes made in the 60s thru the 80s/90s (/2 and Airhead eras) versus what a water-cooled car needs that was manufactured since 2000 and which undergoes relatively frequent overhauls (if raced). Racers need to reduce frictional losses...not something we're that concerned about on our bikes.

I've read through the focused discussions starting with what Paul Glaves announced in the June 1999 ON about BMWs service bulletins at the time API ratings were changing from SG/SH to SJ and cautioned against their use (possibly a warranty issue). SJ oils dropped the ZDDP content (to no more than 1000 ppm) in favor or less harm on catalytic converters but the bulletins seemed to indicate that if the bottle indicated continued adherence to SG/SH, it might be OK to use. I can't see how you can meet SJ but still have the higher ZDDP levels (typically >1200 ppm) in SG/SH. Jeff DiCarlo followed up this with his analysis in October 1999. That article is on the IBMWR webste:

I have also read the four updates done by Matt Parkhouse that first showed up in 2002 and the last was in 2009 (two articles that year).

My next door neighbor is an AMS oil independent distributor and I got a hard copy of a pamphlet ("A Study of Motorcycle Oils", second edition, June 2009) which is on the web if you google it. As you can imagine, AMS oil comes out with top honors but the pamphlet does describe a whole range of tests that were performed...some which we could repeat.

My thought was to update the analyses that had already been done in order to see what oils have changed formulation and to investigate new oils that are now offered. All of the ON analyses have been limited to anti-wear (ZDDP) and anti-corrosion (Ca/Mg etc.) These tests are somewhat easy to do using a spectrograph process measuring the oil vapors when they are hit with an arc.

The AMS oil pamphlet has other tests that I would like to see but are probably very costly:

- viscosity grade -- where does an oil stand in the spec range for a 40w or 50w oil
- wear indicator (4-ball) -- measures the oils ability to minimize wear in metal-to-metal contact. Unfortunately, it appears that there's no direct relationship between zinc levels and minimizing wear.
- volatiliy -- how much of the additive package burns off over time
- acid neutralization -- this helps prevent internal damage over time due to build of acids. This seems like it might be good for bikes that are not ridden that often or stored in winter. It is a strong point for synthetics which is part of why they suggest longer drain intervals when using synthetics.

These tests would require substantial time and money. I plan to discuss some of this with co-workers and get some recommendations for important tests.

Then the hard part will be to get a selection of oils to test. To some degree we should draw from past tests to monitor if there's been any changes. But at the same time, there are many "favorite" oils with varying prices, some you have to buy over the web, some you can get at the local store. I'd want to focus on oils that are labeled SG/SH as well as demonstrate differences in protection if you go beyond this rating.

For a good oil site ( that doesn't sell a product & has lots of oil analysis ) go to Bob the Oil Guy's site. Also many of the manufacturers show a lot of the info you are looking for. The big thing is to use a motorcycle specific oil, to my knowledge they all will meet the SG rating required in the older bikes. ie: airheads.

I received some information about various tests along with costs. The tests that seem interesting and useful to me are:

- oil spectrometry or ICP -- provides chemical analysis of the oil (essentially what's been done in the past)
- viscosity at 40 and 100C -- this would tell how good the blending was to create the given weight of oil
- TAN/TBN -- total acid number and total base number; this provides information on the quality of the additive package

Costs (per bottle) are around:

- ICP -- $50
- Viscosity -- $65
- TAN/TBN -- $100

I guess I can see why only the oil chemistry was done in the past, and only 10-15 bottles were tested, with limitiatons for weight and dino/synth!!

ouch... It's a shame that the pipeline company I work for only deals with gas and petroleum distillate, if we had the equipment for motor oil tested I would've loved to have helped out on this

Well, things aren't as pricey as I thought...at least they're cheaper than where I work!! I contacted Bently Tribology which bought National Tribology, the people that did all the past tests. Looks like we can get some really good tests (as far as I'm concerned). I like the second package:

Well, things aren't as pricey as I thought...at least they're cheaper than where I work!! I contacted Bently Tribology which bought National Tribology, the people that did all the past tests. Looks like we can get some really good tests (as far as I'm concerned). I like the second package:

So are you going to test, clean unused oil or used oil from a bike? What everybody seems to worry about is the zinc/phosphorus level in the oils? Wear metals etc are kind of bike specific.

Something else to consider is that no doubt the company that does the testing keeps a data base. Is there a way, for a fee to do a search for the results from specific oils. It might save time & money.